STRATEGIC GOAL FOUR:
Protect the Rights and Interests of the American People by Legal Representation,
Enforcement of Federal Laws, and Defense of U.S. Interests

The Department of Justice is the Nation's litigator and is often described
as the largest law firm in the world. The Department's attorney staff is administratively
organized into the 94 U.S. Attorneys Offices, 6 litigating divisions (the Antitrust
Division, the Civil Division, the Civil Rights Division, the Criminal Division,
the Environment and Natural Resources Division, and the Tax Division), and the
Office of the Solicitor General.

The U.S. Attorneys serve as the Attorney General's chief law enforcement
officers in each federal judicial district and represent the United States in
most civil and criminal matters. The litigating divisions are centralized repositories
of specialized expertise and perform many critical functions, including representing
the United States in cases that present novel and complex legal and factual issues;
multi-district cases that require a centralized and coordinated response; cases
that require extensive contact (or specialized expertise) with client agencies
whose headquarters are in Washington, D.C.; or cases in which the U.S. Attorney
may be recused.

The Office of the Solicitor General represents the interests of the
United States before the U.S. Supreme Court and authorizes and monitors the government's
activities in the Nation's appellate courts. The U.S. Attorneys, the litigating
divisions, and the Office of the Solicitor General share responsibility for representing
the United States and enforcing the Nation's antitrust, civil, criminal, civil
rights, environmental, and tax laws. Together, they ensure that the Federal Government
speaks with one voice with respect to the law.

The Attorney General has identified a number of priorities that DOJ's litigating
divisions and the U.S. Attorneys will be focusing on in FY 2004. These include
initiatives to protect the public fisc from unmerited claims; to recover monies
owed to the U.S. Treasury; to defend challenges to the Federal Government's laws,
regulations, and initiatives; to vigorously enforce the Nation's civil rights
laws; to continue to focus on enforcing the law even when parties or misdeeds
affecting the U.S. are beyond our shores; and to increase efforts to combat specialized
white collar crime, particularly health care fraud.

The Department of Justice is the chief agency of the Federal Government charged
with protecting constitutional and statutory rights guaranteed to all Americans.
Through the Department's Civil Rights Division (CRT), the FBI and the United States
Attorneys (USAs), DOJ enforces numerous civil rights laws including the Americans
with Disabilities Act; the Fair Housing Act; the Civil Rights Acts of 1964, 1968,
and 1991; the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act; the Equal Education Opportunities
Act of 1974; and the Immigration Reform and Control Act. In addition, the Department
also investigates and prosecutes criminal violations of the Nation's civil rights
laws, involving matters such as police misconduct, hate crimes, church arson and
desecration, and involuntary servitude.

Our objective also requires that we educate the public about the federal civil
rights laws, fostering voluntary compliance to the civil rights ideals of non-discrimination,
equal opportunity and justice, so that all Americans can be treated with dignity
and enjoy the full bounty of the American ideals of equality, fairness, and equal
opportunity. The DOJ promotes compliance with basic federal civil rights protections
through a multi-faceted enforcement program. These civil rights laws influence
a broad spectrum of conduct by individuals and public and private institutions.
They prohibit discriminatory conduct in such areas as law enforcement, housing,
employment, education, voting, lending, public accommodations, access to services
and facilities, treatment of juvenile and adult detainees, and residents of nursing
homes. They also provide criminal safeguards against hate crimes and criminal
and civil safeguards against official misconduct.

The DOJ is the protector of the rule of law within the Executive Branch of
government. Fair and uniform enforcement of federal law to prevent hate crimes,
police profiling, and a host of other pernicious discriminatory conduct is crucial
to the public's trust of government and law enforcement. In recent years, the
role of the Department has expanded to issues that capture national attention,
such as church arson, clinic bombings, police-profiling and hate crimes. These
unpredictable events require the Department to respond both appropriately and
creatively.

Police and other official misconduct; crimes of racial violence such as cross-burning,
arson, and vandalism; reproductive health care violence and obstruction; victimization
of migrant workers; discrimination in housing, lending, education, employment,
and voting; and the basic rights of persons with disabilities will continue to
be high priorities for resource allocations.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE & ANNUAL GOAL 4.2: ENVIRONMENT
Promote the stewardship of America's environment and natural resources through
the enforcement and defense of environmental laws and programs

Safeguarding the Nation's environment and natural resources for this and future
generations is a major DOJ priority for FY 2003. DOJ's Environment and Natural
Resources Division (ENRD), FBI, and U.S. Attorneys will work together with other
federal agencies to enforce environmental laws; protect our natural resources;
defend federal agency environmental regulations and government pollution abatement
laws and programs; and assist in fulfillment of U.S. trust responsibilities. As
the Nation's chief environmental litigator, the Department will strive to increase
compliance with environmental laws, deter future violations of those laws, seek
redress and civil penalties for past violations that harm the environment, and
seek recoupment of federal funds spent to abate environmental contamination, and
monies to restore or replace damaged natural resources.

The Antitrust Division (ATR) maintains and promotes competitive markets by
enforcing, improving, and educating people about antitrust laws and principles.
Enforcement of antitrust laws is pursued through the investigation and prosecution
of business arrangements and practices that encourage anticompetitive behavior
and lessen competition, whether those arrangements and practices involve mergers,
international criminal conspiracies, or other potentially anticompetitive business
practices. Improvements to antitrust laws and principles are pursued through participation
in interagency regulatory processes, interagency task forces, and international
bodies (i.e., the World Trade Organization). Whether through direct contact and
targeted communication with specific audiences, or via the development, publication,
and distribution of policy guidance, ATR seeks to increase the breadth and depth
of awareness of antitrust law and the promotion of free and open competition to
the benefit of all U.S. consumers and businesses.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE & ANNUAL GOAL 4.4: TAX LAWS
Promote the fair, correct, and uniform enforcement of the federal tax laws and
the collection of tax debts to protect the public fisc from unjustified claims

The Tax Division (TAX) utilizes civil litigation to ensure that the Nation's
internal revenue laws are fairly and uniformly applied and that the public complies
with the Nation's tax laws. TAX contributes significantly and directly to efforts
by the Administration and Congress to protect the Federal fisc from unmerited
claims involving tax related issues and to promote voluntary compliance with the
tax laws. In addition, TAX protects the public fisc by defending the rights of
the United States. TAX's attorneys are guided throughout each stage of litigation
by the principles of fair and uniform treatment for all categories of litigants.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE & ANNUAL GOAL 4.5: CIVIL LAWS
Effectively represent the interests of the United States in all civil matters
for which the Department of Justice has jurisdiction

DOJ will continue to represent the United States in civil matters, protecting
the public fisc, ensuring that the Federal Government speaks with one voice in
its view of the law, preserving the intent of Congress, and advancing the credibility
of the United States before the courts. In addition, DOJ will continue to place
emphasis on the expanded and appropriate use of alternative dispute resolution
(ADR).

Required Skills: The Department requires attorneys and support
staff experienced in constitutional and statutory civil law. ENRD and the U.S.
Attorneys require attorneys, particularly litigators, experienced in civil, administrative
and appellate environmental law. Experienced legal support staff (paralegals and
litigation support assistants) and administrative specialists are also essential.
The FBI requires agents experienced in civil rights violation investigations.
Additionally, the FBI requires experienced skilled investigators, particularly
in the area of fraud. ATR requires experienced attorneys, economists, paralegals
and support staff. ATR's desires attorneys experienced in conducting complex,
international investigations and economists experienced in analyzing multi-million
or -billion dollar mergers in newly emerging markets are particularly valued in
the current operating environment. The Tax Division requires top-tier attorneys
at all experience levels, and managers with significant litigation experience
and substantive tax knowledge to litigate the full range of tax cases initiated
by the United States and taxpayers. TAX also requires skilled data management
specialists, litigation assistants and paralegals to support litigation. Additionally,
experts and consultants are needed to analyze complex issues and present findings
in court.

Information Technology Utilized: Civil Rights Division relies
on its Interactive Case Management (ICM) system and desktop office automation
system. FBI relies on ISRAA, a centralized database that tracks statistical information
on cases from inception to closure; and ACS, a database that captures all information
pertaining to administration of cases. ENRD relies upon its version of the DOJ
Justice Consolidated Office Network (JCON) and its Case Management System. ATR
relies upon its Matter Tracking System and companion user interfaces; office systems,
including networks and infrastructure; litigation support tools and applications,
including those for courtroom presentations; and data storage capacity related
to all of these technologies. The Tax Division relies upon the Justice Consolidated
Office Network (JCONII) system and recently implemented TaxDoc Case Management
System. The Civil Division relies on CASES its case management system, as well
as on Automated Litigation Support (ALS) to scan documents, create databases and
provide ready access to evidentiary information.

Background/Program Objectives:
The Civil Rights Division (CRT) works with the FBI and the U.S. Attorneys to prosecute
cases of national significance involving the deprivations of Constitutional liberties
that cannot be, or are not, sufficiently addressed by state or local authorities.
These include acts of bias-motivated violence; misconduct by local and federal
law enforcement officials; violations of the peonage and involuntary servitude
statutes that protect migrant workers and others held in bondage; criminal provisions
which prohibit conduct intended to injure, intimidate, or interfere with persons
seeking to obtain or to provide reproductive health services; as well as a law
that proscribes interference with persons in the exercise of their religious beliefs
and the destruction of religious property. The federal criminal civil rights statutes
provide for prosecutions of conspiracies to interfere with federally protected
rights, deprivation of rights under color of the law, and the use of threat or
force to injure or intimidate persons in their enjoyment of specific rights.

Data Validation and Verification: Quality assurance includes regular
interviews of attorneys to review the data, input screens programmed for data
completeness and accuracy; and verification of representative data samples by
upper management.

Data Limitations: None known at this time.

Performance:

Performance Measure: % Successful Civil Rights Prosecutions
[CRT]

FY 2002 Target: 87%

FY 2002 Actual: 91%

Discussion: In FY 2002, CRT exceeded its target
for successful prosecutions by 4%. A total of 136 defendants were prosecuted,
which resulted in 124 convictions, including 88 guilty pleas. Out of the 124 convictions,
68 were law enforcement officers.

Public Benefit: CRT often prosecutes matters of
intense public interest involving acts of racial and ethnic violence, violence
intended to interfere with religion, abuse of power by local and federal law enforcement
officials, violations of human trafficking and involuntary servitude statutes
that protect migrant workers and others held in bondage, and criminal acts in
violation of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act.

Crosscutting Activities:
CRT's Criminal Section participates in several cross-cutting programs: the National
Church Arson Task Force, which joins the efforts of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms, and Explosives (ATF); the Worker Exploitation Task Force, which brings
together the Department of Labor, Department of State, and Health and Human Services
to address involuntary servitude, slavery, trafficking, and other criminal violations
involving undocumented workers; and the National Task Force on Violence Against
Health Care Providers, which ATF coordinates the investigation and prosecution
of violations of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. The Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Criminal Section work together
to ensure that discriminatory interference with housing rights are effectively
addressed. Additionally, the U.S. Customs, ATF, and the U.S. Secret Service telefax
complaints to the section relating to official misconduct by federal law enforcement
officers.

4.1B Prosecute Pattern or Practice Civil Rights Violations

Background/Program Objectives:
Civil "pattern or practice" litigation is divided into five main areas:
Housing and Civil Enforcement, Employment Litigation, Disability Rights, Special
Litigation, and Office of Special Counsel (OSC). Housing and Civil Enforcement
focuses on discriminatory activities by lending and insurance institutions, illegal
discrimination in all types of housing transactions including the sale and rental
of housing and the failure to design and build multifamily living to be accessible,
discriminatory land use by municipalities, discrimination in places of public
accommodations, and discrimination against religious institutions by local zoning
authorities.

Employment Litigation focuses on employment discrimination on the grounds of
race, color, sex, religion, and national origin. This includes pattern or practice
cases against agencies such as: state, county, and local law enforcement organizations;
fire departments; state departments of correction; public school districts; and
state departments of transportation. These are complex cases that seek to eliminate
employment practices that have the effect of denying employment opportunities
or otherwise discriminating against one or more protected classes of individuals.
Relief reforming discriminatory practice and policies is a primary objective.
Employment Litigation also obtains jobs, back pay, and other forms of relief for
victims.

Disability Rights enforces the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) on behalf
of people with disabilities. Enforcement responsibilities cover a broad spectrum
of potential actions to encourage individuals and entities to comply with ADA
requirements, including new construction, removal of physical barriers, provision
of auxiliary aids, access to employment, and the elimination of discriminatory
policies. These enforcements, combined with mediation and technical assistance
programs, provide cost-effective and dynamic approaches for carrying out the ADA's
mandates in conformance with the current administration's New Freedom Initiatives.

Special Litigation focuses on pattern or practice of misconduct or discrimination
by law enforcement officers including the denial of constitutional and statutory
rights and discrimination based on race, color, national origin, gender, or religion.
National media attention and outreach led to an increased volume of complaints
in this area. An additional area of concern focuses on the deprivation of constitutional
and federal statutory rights of persons in publicly operated residential facilities
that are subjected to patterns of egregious and flagrant conditions of confinement.
These facilities include: institutions for the mentally ill and developmentally
disabled, nursing homes, juvenile detention facilities, local jails, and prisons;
however, DOJ does not have authority to pursue an individual claim.

Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices
enforces the anti-discrimination provision of the Immigration and Nationality
Act on behalf of all U.S. legal workers, including U.S. citizens, lawful permanent
residents, asylees and refugees. These cases focus upon employment discrimination
cases based upon citizenship or immigration status, and national origin, and include
both individual and pattern or practice litigation that seeks to ensure that all
legal workers, whether U.S. citizens or legal immigrants, are treated fairly during
the hiring and employment verification process. The OSC obtains cease and desist
orders, relief for victims, including back pay and jobs, and civil penalties.

Discussion: CRT ended the year 5% above target for
the percentage of Pattern or Practice Cases Successfully Litigated. The Housing
and Civil Enforcement Section resolved 23 pattern or practice complaints with
judgments, consent orders or settlement agreements providing significant relief
to aggrieved persons. The Special Litigation Section successfully resolved a total
of 13 cases. In addition to these 13 resolutions, the Section was able to resolve
three investigations through out-of-court settlements with the Cincinnati Police
Department, the Buffalo, New York Police Department, and the Bergen Regional Medical
Center in Paramus, New Jersey. OSC successfully resolved 2 pattern or practice
cases. The Disability Rights Section successfully resolved 2 pattern or practice
cases. Litigation continues against a national theater chain to correct access
violations in stadium style movie theaters.

Public Benefit: Success in cases involving institutionalized
persons resulted in improved medical and mental healthcare, supervision, use of
force polices and practices and, where appropriate, discharge planning for community
placement of institutionalized persons. The police misconduct cases addressed
improvements in law enforcement practices, the investigation of police misconduct
complaints, and the training of police personnel. Other cases successfully resolved
involved fair housing, fair lending and public accommodations cases, and a wide
range of allegations including sexual harassment, race, national origin, familial
statutes and disability discrimination. These resolutions provided for the design
and construction of accessible housing units, the establishment of fair housing
and fair lending policies, training and monitoring, and approximately $5 million
in monetary relief. The pattern or practice cases on behalf of people with disabilities
continued to uphold the promise of equal access to life opportunities. The OSC
cases ensured that employers fully comply with applicable anti-discrimination
requirements, they helped ensure that employees understand their rights to a discrimination
free workplace.

Strategies to Achieve the FY2003/FY 2004 Goal:
DOJ will continue to address pattern or practice civil rights cases, including
police misconduct, fair housing, fair lending, employment discrimination, and
disability discrimination. The discretionary pattern or practice cases in Housing
and Civil Enforcement remain the highest priority because of their broader impact.
Special Litigation's priority will be given to providing outreach, training, and
consultation in the prevention of pattern or practice of law enforcement misconduct.
In addition, institutions will be monitored closely to ensure that adequate treatment
and living conditions are achieved and maintained, and that appropriate placements
of persons with disabilities are made in the most integrated setting. Employment
Litigation will continue its present litigation and will emphasize identifying
and instituting litigation to eliminate policies or practices of discrimination
including, hiring, promotion, testing or assignment practices that discriminate
on the basis of race, sex, religion, or national origin. Disability Rights will
continue to focus on pattern and practice cases including participation in civic
life (such as town halls, municipal buildings, and courts), access to employment,
new construction, transportation, higher education, healthcare, and access to
other public accommodations. The Office of Special Counsel will continue to focus
on educational outreach for workers, employers, and non-governmental organizations
to minimize the incidences of pattern and practice.

Crosscutting Activities:
Pattern or practice cases provide the opportunity to address egregious and systemic
violations of civil rights laws. In order to bring these cases to court, DOJ coordinates
its efforts internally among the CRT, FBI, BOP, USMS, USAs, and externally with
federal partners, including the Department of Labor, the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the Department
of Health and Human Services.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE & ANNUAL GOAL 4.2: ENVIRONMENT Promote the stewardship of America's environment and natural resources through
the enforcement and defense of environmental laws and programs.

4.2A Enforce and Defend Environmental and Natural Resource Laws

Background/Program Objectives:
The Department of Justice enforces environmental laws to protect the health and
environment of the United States and its citizens, defends environmental challenges
to government programs and activities, and represents the United States in all
matters concerning the protection, use, and development of the Nation's natural
resources and public lands, wildlife protection, Indian rights and claims, and
the acquisition of federal property.

Data Collection and Storage: A majority of the performance data submitted
by ENRD is generated from the division's Case Management System (CMS).

Data Validation and Verification: The Division has instituted a formal
data quality assurance program to ensure a quarterly review of the Division's
docket. The systems data is constantly being monitored by the Division to maintain
accuracy.

Discussion: The Department experienced numerous
successes in affirmative and defensive cases during FY 2002. Included in those
successes is the defense of federal regulatory programs and initiatives and federal
agencies against claims alleging noncompliance with federal, state and local pollution
control statutes. The Department defended federal programs such as military preparedness
regarding sonar technology testing, and training exercises on the Island of Vieques.
Our enforcement efforts resulted in cleanup of toxic waste sites, installation
of new pollution control equipment at power companies and oil refineries, and
restructured and updated municipal sewage treatment systems.

Public Benefit: The successes of the Department
ensures the correction of pollution control deficiencies, reduction of harmful
discharges into the air, water, and land, clean up of leaks and abandoned waste,
and proper disposal of solid and hazardous waste. In addition, the Department's
enforcement efforts help ensure military preparedness, safeguard the quality of
the environment of the United States, and to protect the health and safety of
its citizens.

FY 2002 Target: In accordance with Department guidance,
targeted levels of performance are not projected for this indicator.

FY 2002 Actual: $6.1 billion Avoided; $0.6 billion
Awarded

Discussion: The Department successfully represented
a wide range of government agencies in suits that challenged environmental and
public land policies and environmental programs and in cases seeking money from
the government. We were also successful in defending the United States in the
Court of Federal Claims saving the government civil monetary liability in the
hundreds of millions of dollars. The Department aggressively enforced the environmental
statutes of the United States. One case included a cost avoidance victory of $4.7
billion where the plaintiff was seeking damages claiming that the federal government
was unlawfully preventing mining in the Chugach National Forest resulting from
the National Forest Service's requirement to file and gain subsequent approval
of a plan of operation. In another case, the second highest Clean Water Act judgment
of $8.2 million was awarded after trial against a steal company for its unlawful
discharges of oil and pollutants from five steal mills it operates in Pennsylvania.
In addition, a case addressing the cleanup of sites contaminated with hazardous
substances resulted in a cost recovery of $115.5 million from a petroleum manufacturer
for the clean up of a site in Texas. The Department also defended Indian Tribes
securing an award of $248 million in damages from a state where a Tribe's land
was acquired illegally.

FY 2003 Performance Target: N/A

FY 2004 Performance Target: N/A

Public Benefit: The Department's efforts to defend
federal programs, ensure compliance with environmental and natural resource statutes,
win civil penalties, recoup federal funds spent to abate environmental contamination,
ensure military preparedness, and ensure the safety and security of our water
supply, demonstrated that the United States' environmental laws and regulations
are being vigorously enforced. Polluters who violate these laws are not being
allowed to gain an unfair economic advantage over law-abiding companies. The deterrent
effect of the Department's work encourages voluntary compliance with the environmental
and natural resource laws, thereby improving the environment, the quality of our
natural resources, and the safety and health of United States' citizens.

Strategies to Achieve the FY2003/FY 2004 Goal:
DOJ will work closely with client agencies to develop enforcement strategies specifically
targeted to achieve widespread deterrence and encourage effective compliance across
whole industry sectors that are major sources of pollution, including actions
to enforce corporate responsibility by companies with environmental obligations.
We also will defend the operating programs, permitting decisions and regulations
of the federal agencies with a specific focus on defending a wide range of cases
including: the largest and most complex Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) defensive matters for which potential
liability is estimated in the billions of dollars; ongoing defense of the Army's
$15 billion Chemical Demilitarization Program for destroying the nation's stockpile
of chemical weapons as mandated by Congress and an International Chemical Weapons
Convention; and handling new litigation challenges to Federal energy, transportation
and environmental programs. Efforts will continue to enforce the Clean Water Act,
Clean Air Act, Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Safe Drinking
Water Act, and to bring actions under CERCLA to replenish the Superfund. We expect
increased litigation to substantially reduce, if not eliminate, gained economic
advantages of non-compliance. Additionally, we expect increased litigation to
protect the nation's infrastructure, particularly focused on the safety of pipelines
and major industrial and chemical manufacturing plants where enforcement actions
can reduce the risk of catastrophic accidents. The Department will also continue
to vigorously litigate its enforcement actions against coal fired power plants,
oil refineries, and other major industries seeking to reduce unlawful emissions
of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulate matter that have been shown
to cause adverse respiratory health effects in millions of Americans. The Department
will continue to focus on tribal land and water claims, as well as issues pertaining
to jurisdiction on Indian trust lands. Included in these cases are those that
establish jurisdiction for law enforcement authorities over member and nonmember
Indians, as well as non-Indians inside reservation boundaries, which is essential
for effective law enforcement. In addition, the Department will litigate to address
other issues regarding jurisdiction; to establish and protect treaty-based hunting
and fishing rights; and to deter and remediate pollution problems on Indian lands.
The demands of thousands of condemnations in the Everglades will continue in FY
2003.

Crosscutting Activities:
The Environment Division, FBI and USAs are working collectively with federal agencies
including the EPA, Departments of Agriculture and the Interior, and state and
local governments to strengthen enforcement of environmental laws and statutes
and to preserve public lands, natural resources, and tribal sovereignty.

Background/Program Objectives:
The Antitrust Division (ATR) maintains and promotes competitive markets largely
by enforcing federal civil and criminal antitrust laws. The statutory authority
for the ATR's mission includes Sections 1and 2 of the Sherman Act; Section 7 of
the Clayton Act, as amended by the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act
of 1976; and a variety of other competition laws and regulations. These laws affect
virtually all industries and apply to every phase of business, including manufacturing,
transportation, distribution, and marketing. They prohibit a variety of practices
that restrain trade, such as mergers likely to reduce the competitive vigor of
particular markets, predatory acts designed to maintain or achieve monopoly power,
and per se illegal bid rigging. Successful enforcement of these laws decreases
and deters anticompetitive behavior, saves U.S. consumers billions of dollars,
allows them to receive goods and services of the highest quality at the lowest
price, and enables U.S. businesses to compete on a level playing field nationally
and internationally.

Data Limitations: In calculating consumer savings across our enforcement
areas, key input measures, if not actually estimated in the investigation or case,
were estimated based on anecdotal information and observations. These values are
both conservative and consistently estimated over time.

Discussion: The success rate for civil non-merger
matters includes investigations in which business practices were changed after
the investigation was initiated, a case was filed with consent decree, or a case
was filed and litigated successfully. ATR's success in preventing anticompetitive
behavior in the civil non-merger arena has been notable. ATR won every case it
challenged in FY 2001 and FY 2002 and has exceeded the FY 2002 target of 90%.
The success rate for merger transactions challenged includes mergers that are
abandoned, fixed before a complaint is file, filed as cases with consent decrees,
filed as cases but settled prior to litigation, or filed and litigated successfully.
Although the merger workload has declined, many of the matters involve complex
anticompetitive behavior and large, multinational corporations and require significant
resources to review. ATR achieved considerable success in preventing anticompetitive
mergers, and exceeded the FY 2002 target success rate for merger transactions
challenged.

Public Benefit: ATR's enforcement efforts in its
civil program are essential to the overall health of the U.S. economy. By blocking
potentially anticompetitive mergers and pursuing other potentially illegal behavior
such as group boycotts or exclusive dealing arrangements, ATR safeguards competition
and promotes innovation. The ultimate beneficiary of our work is the consumer
who is afforded a greater choice of quality products at lower prices.

Performance Measure: Savings to U.S. Consumers (as
the result of ATR's Civil enforcement efforts) [ATR]

FY 2002 Target: In accordance with Department guidance,
targeted levels of performance are not projected for this indicator.

FY 2002 Actual: $.5 billion ($481 million)

Discussion: The estimated value of consumer savings
generated by ATR's civil enforcement efforts in any given year depends upon the
size and scope of the matters encountered and thus, varies considerably.

FY 2003 Performance Target: N/A

FY 2004 Performance Target: N/A

Public Benefit: Success in these areas saves U.S.
consumers billions of dollars and ensures there are a sufficient number of competitors
to maintain competition, which spurs research and development, innovation, the
development of new and better products and service, and the best prices and quality
for consumers.

Strategies to Achieve the FY2003/FY 2004 Goal:
ATR employs two distinct strategies to maintain and promote competition (and to
decrease and deter anticompetitive business behavior and practices). First is
our merger enforcement strategy. This strategy focuses on the investigation and
litigation of instances in which monopoly power is sought, attained, or maintained
through anticompetitive conduct and by seeking injunctive relief against mergers
and acquisitions that may tend to substantially lessen competition. Second, our
civil non-merger enforcement strategy supports the investigation and prosecution
of civil non-merger matters to suspend or deter anticompetitive behavior. Other
behavior, such as group boycotts or exclusive dealing arrangements, that inappropriately
restrain free and open trade or commerce is illegal under Section 1 of the Sherman
Act.

Crosscutting Activities:
ATR and the Federal Trade Commission share responsibility for merger enforcement
by law and practice. ATR also maintains relationships with the FBI and the Executive
Office for U.S. Attorneys in support of its mission.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE & ANNUAL GOAL 4.4: TAX LAWS Promote the fair, correct, and uniform enforcement of the federal tax laws
and the collection of tax debts to protect the public fisc from unjustified claims

4.4A Enforce Tax Laws Fairly and Uniformly

Background/Program Objectives:
TAX plays an important role in maintaining the largest source of funding for federal
government activities, the federal tax system. TAX promotes tax compliance and
protects the public fisc by enforcing the tax laws in the federal appellate courts,
the federal district and bankruptcy courts, the Court of Federal Claims, and the
state courts. Vigorous, efficient, and fair enforcement promotes voluntary compliance
with the tax laws and ensures a continued flow of revenue to the Government to
fund its operations. TAX defends the interests of the United States in tax litigation
brought against the government and also initiates meritorious litigation referred
to it by the IRS and other federal agencies. It provides expert litigation and
substantive tax advice to USAs and advises the Department of Treasury and Congress
on tax-related legislative matters.

Data Definition: A settlement is an agreed disposition of a case
that the client agency has asked us to defend or prosecute and which is based
on both parties taking less than they could ultimately obtain if they were completely
successful in the litigation and in collecting any judgment. A concession
is a voluntary disposition, without a quid pro quo, of a case or an issue that
the client agency did not agree to at the administrative level or initially asked
us to defend, or of a case in which suit has been authorized on behalf of the
Attorney General, on the basis that the case should not be defended or prosecuted.
An other agreed disposition is any other agreed disposition that does not
require a determination on the merits by the court and results in some litigation
benefit to the non-government party. Other dispositions usually occur where the
matter reaches litigation without prior administrative consideration so that the
client agency does not have an opportunity to take a per-litigation position and
does not take a position in the litigation.

Data Collection and Storage: TAX utilizes a case management system known
as TaxDoc. The Division recently revised the complement of indicators that are
tracked.

Data Validation and Verification: There are new procedures to collect
and record pertinent data. Section Chiefs make projections and set goals. On a
quarterly basis, the Performance Management Committee reviews all the statistics.

Data Limitations: The Division lacks historical data on some activities
that are now tracked in the new case management system. The new information system
may cause variations in the way some statistics are presented.

Performance:

Performance Measure: DISCONTINUED MEASURE: Civil
Settlements and Concessions (all Courts) [TAX] (NOTE: This measure has been discontinued
as it is not outcome oriented.)

Discussion: To ensure that the tax laws are equitably
and consistently enforced throughout the nation, TAX determines that some cases
should not go to trial and should instead be resolved through settlement, concession,
or other agreed disposition. The number of cases so resolved in any fiscal year
depends on a number of variables, including the actual number of cases susceptible
to settlement, their complexity, the number of tax years involved, and the dollar
amounts at issue. Because these variables change greatly from year to year, it
is often difficult to generate accurate estimates. As a result, there are frequently
significant differences between the projected and actual numbers of civil settlements
and concessions. There were fewer civil cases ready for trial or other disposition
during FY 2002, which meant that there were fewer settlements, concessions, and
other dispositions than projected. The primary reason for this change is the shift
in the composition of referred cases toward sophisticated, resource-intensive
cases involving enormous dollar amounts (as confirmed by the increased collections
and retentions reflected below). Also, an unexpectedly large percentage of TAX's
cases arose from enforcement initiatives generating cases not susceptible to settlement
(i.e. tax promoters or tax protesters).

Public Benefit: Ensuring that tax laws are enforced
uniformly, vigorously, efficiently, and fairly promotes voluntary tax compliance.
Honest taxpayers see that violators are held accountable and that non-compliance
with the tax laws carries serious adverse consequences. In turn, voluntary tax
compliance ensures that the federal fisc is protected and the Government is properly
funded.

Discussion: These successes resulted in legal precedent
that provided taxpayers, including individuals, businesses and industries, with
guidance regarding their tax obligations, as well as the collection of significant
tax revenues and the protection of the fisc against unfounded taxpayer claims.
TAX targeted the promoters of abusive tax schemes and scams sold on the internet
and obtained injunctions halting the promotions. TAX also prevailed in litigation
that identified for the IRS many thousands of taxpayers likely to have evaded
taxes.

Public Benefit: Success in these areas saves U.S.
consumers billions of dollars and ensures there are a sufficient number of competitors
to maintain competition, which spurs research and development, innovation, the
development of new and better products and service, and the best prices and quality
for consumers.

FY 2002 Target: In accordance with Department guidance,
targeted levels of performance are not projected for this indicator.

FY 2002 Actual: $90 million collected; $1.246 billion
retained

Discussion: TAX collected substantial amounts for
the federal fisc in affirmative litigation and retained even more substantial
amounts in defensive tax refund and other litigation. In addition, its litigation
affected the revenue involved in many cases being handled administratively by
the IRS. The Department does not measure the revenue effect of its litigation
on IRS cases. This indicator fluctuates in response to the type and stage of litigation
resolved during the year. Five exceedingly complex, resource-intensive cases generated
approximately 77% of the $1.246 billion retained by the Tax Division in FY 2002.
Of the $90 million collected in FY 2002, $34 million resulted from three similarly
complex, resource-intensive cases involving issues ranging from personal income
taxes to corporate fraud.

FY 2003 Performance Target: N/A

FY 2004 Performance Target: N/A

Public Benefit: See above.

Strategies to Achieve the FY2003/FY 2004 Goal:
TAX will continue its efforts to clarify the law, defend against unmerited claims,
fairly pursue civil violations of our tax laws, collect taxes owed, and defend
against those who seek to undermine compliance with the Internal Revenue Code
and evade or avoid federal taxes. As part of this effort, TAX will concentrate
on: the shut down of widely-promoted abusive tax schemes and scams; the elimination
of abusive corporate tax shelters; and the identification, investigation, and
targeting of taxpayers using offshore bank accounts to evade taxes. TAX will:
1) litigate complex corporate tax shelter cases affecting billions of dollars
in revenue, coordinating within TAX and with IRS so that similar shelters are
tracked and handled effectively and consistently; 2) use civil injunctive and
penalty litigation to combat the promotion of abusive tax schemes on the internet;
and 3) develop a common strategy to detect, fight, and punish the use of offshore
bank accounts to evade or avoid taxes. TAX will continue to maintain a special
counsel for tax protest matters to respond to new issues arising in the illegal
tax protest movement.

Crosscutting Activities:
In addition to its work providing tax advice to other Divisions and agencies,
TAX and IRS frequently consult on new and sensitive tax issues and litigation.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE & ANNUAL GOAL 4.5: CIVIL LAWS Effectively represent the interests of the United States in all civil matters
for which the Department of Justice has jurisdiction

4.5A Protect the Public Fisc

Background/Program Objectives:
Billions of dollars are saved annually through DOJ's successful defense of the
public fisc in lawsuits alleging unwarranted monetary claims. Plaintiffs advancing
contract claims, allegations of government misconduct, claims of patent infringement
and the like, expose the government to potentially staggering losses. DOJ consistently
mounts a strong defense against unwarranted and exaggerated claims to ensure that
only those claims with merit under the law are paid.

% of Defensive Civil Monetary Cases where 85% or more of the
Claim is Defeated [CIV]d

Data Collection and Storage: The primary source of data collection for
measurement within the Civil Division is the automated case management system
(CASES).

Data Validation and Verification: Contractor staff regularly review
case listings and interview attorneys concerning the status of each case. Exception
reports are generated and reviewed. Attorney managers review numerous monthly
reports for data completeness and accuracy. The contractor executes a comprehensive
quality control plan in which representative samples of data are verified. Another
independent contractor verifies aspects of the work of the case management contractor.

Data Limitations: Incomplete data can cause the system to under-report
case closures and attorney time. Missing data are most often retrieved as a result
of the contractor interviews and the review of monthly reports. To minimize the
extent of missing data, CIV makes adherence to administrative reporting requirements,
including CASES, a performance element in all attorney work plans.

Performance:

Performance Measure: % of Defensive Civil Monetary
Cases Where 85% or More of the Claim is Defeated [CIV]

FY 2002 Target: 80%

FY 2002 Actual: 86%

Discussion: For the third straight year, the Civil
Division exceeded its 80% goal. This accomplishment understates CIV's success
because, by definition, the measure excludes cases that do not specify monetary
amounts, such as challenges to provisions in entitlement programs, including Medicare.
CIV's effective defense of these provisions that limit federal expenditures affect
billions of dollars of public funds annually.

Public Benefit: Favorable resolutions in defensive cases prevent
the Treasury from incurring massive losses and preserve funds to support the counterterrorism
fight, military objectives, economic stimulus efforts, or other key initiatives.

The following cases are examples of CIV's efforts on behalf of taxpayers. Thousands
of plaintiffs, who asserted losses exceeding $1 billion, brought third-party claims
against the government in Valenzuela v. Hughes. CIV's negotiation of a
voluntary dismissal ended the government's role in this 15-year-old suit. In a
patent case, Exxon agreed to accept $2,583 to settle a claim that the company
valued at more than $100 million.

Performance Measure: $ Collected From Affirmative
Civil Cases [JMD]

FY 2002 Target: In accordance with Department guidance,
targeted levels of performance are not projected for this indicator.

FY 2002 Actual: $2.2 billion

Discussion: See above.

FY 2003 Performance Target: N/A

FY 2004 Performance Target: N/A

Public Benefit: See above.

Strategies to Achieve the FY2003/FY 2004 Goal:
DOJ legal staff will fight for and guard the financial interests of the United
States at trial, at the settlement table, and at the highest levels of judicial
review, asserting the taxpayers' stake in financial disputes as they move through
appellate stages. Automated Litigation Support will be employed to master voluminous
evidence collections and prepare for trial. Experts and consultants will be enlisted
to enhance the government's case in complex and technical suits, as well as to
refute the assertions of our well-financed opponents.

DOJ will investigate allegations brought forth by "whistle blowers"
and, where appropriate, seek recoveries and civil penalties. Through collaborative
efforts with other federal and state agencies we will pursue health care fraud
enforcement, emphasizing massive cases with potential recoveries in the billions
of dollars. The taxpayers' interests will be effectively represented in bankruptcies
and loan defaults. Finally, alternative dispute resolution will be increasingly
used as an alternative to litigation.

Crosscutting Activities:
The Civil Division works closely with the Department of Health and Human Services
and the Office of Special Masters at the U.S. Court of Federal Claims to justly
resolve vaccine claims and to coordinate policy.

4.5B Continue Vigorous Civil Enforcement

Background/Program Objectives:
The number one priority of the Department of Justice is fighting the war on terrorism.
By securing favorable resolutions in civil cases, the Civil Division ensures the
intent of Congress, as well as represents the government's response to some of
the most probing issues of our time. Examples include, but are not limited to,
litigation concerning the freezing of terrorist financial assets, cases challenging
the constitutionality of federal statutes, and tort cases brought against third
parties where sensitive security information is sought from the United States.

DOJ attorneys must also respond to a variety of immigration-related suits,
including a heightened level of counterterrorsim litigation and constitutional
challenges to new immigration laws or reformed procedures. Landmark cases concern
the detainees at Guantanamo Bay and New York, the media's access to immigration
hearings, and constitutional challenges to the USA PATRIOT Act. The majority of
immigration cases involves individual or class actions opposing actions by the
INS and immigration judges.

Moreover, to safeguard Medicare and other federally funded health programs,
combating health care fraud remains a key focus. Recoveries in health care fraud
actions have already topped $5.2 billion and are expected to increase, since the
current docket includes a number of matters with the potential of significant
recoveries.

DOJ serves a vital role when the laws, programs and policies of the United
States are attacked in court. These actions run the full gamut, such as challenges
to Presidential determinations under the War Powers Act, to suits disputing the
administration of the Medicare program. Other notable litigation involves the
inclusion of the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, campaign
finance reform, airline passenger identification requirements and luggage searches,
intercepted cell-phone communications, and the military's press policy.

Data Collection and Storage: The primary source of data collection for
measurement within the Justice Management Division is the Financial Management
Information System (FMIS).

Data Validation and Verification: The Debt Accounting Operations Group,
Finance Staff, JMD executes a comprehensive quality control plan in processing
all collections by the DOJ.

Data Limitations: Miscoded information can cause the system to under-report
specific recoveries under the heading of health care; however, this does
not affect the actual monetary recoveries realized.

Performance:

Performance Measure: $ Collected from Civil Health
Care Fraud [JMD]

FY 2002 Target: In accordance with Department guidance,
targeted levels of performance are not projected for this indicator.

FY 2002 Actual: $1.4 billion

Discussion:See Public Benefit below.

FY 2003 Performance Target: N/A

FY 2004 Performance Target: N/A

Public Benefit: Department attorneys reached a $585 million civil
settlement with TAP Pharmaceuticals, the manufacturer of Lupron, a drug used for
the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. In addition, TAP agreed to pay a criminal
fine of $290 million, the largest fine ever in a health care fraud prosecution,
bringing the total recovery to $875 million. For more additional information on
this case see the Public Benefits section under 2.4A.

Schering-Plough Corporation agreed to pay $500 million to resolve allegations
that the company did not manufacture drugs in compliance with Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) regulations. For example, it was found that the company manufactured asthma
inhalers without the correct amount of medicine inside.

Data Collection and Storage: The primary source of data collection for
measurement within the Civil Division is the automated case management system
(CASES). Data for EOUSA are derived from USAs central case management system,
which contains district information including criminal matters, cases, and appeals.

Data Validation and Verification: Within Civil Division: Contractor
staff regularly review case listings and interview attorneys concerning the status
of each case. Exception reports are generated and reviewed. Attorney managers
review numerous monthly reports for data completeness and accuracy. The contractor
executes a comprehensive quality control plan in which representative samples
of data are verified. Another independent contractor verifies aspects of the work
of the case management contractor. EOUSA: The USAs offices are required to submit
bi-yearly case data certifications to EOUSA. The data are reviewed by knowledgeable
personnel (such as supervisory attorneys and legal clerks) in each district.

Data Limitations: Civil Division: Incomplete data can cause the system
to under-report case closures and attorney time. Missing data are most often retrieved
as a result of the contractor interviews and the review of monthly reports. To
minimize the extent of missing data, CIV made adherence to the reporting requirements
of CASES a performance element in all attorney work plans. EOUSA: Data are reviewed
by knowledgeable personnel (such as supervisory attorneys and legal clerks) in
each district.

Performance Measure: % of Favorable Resolutions
in Civil Cases [CIV, EOUSA] (NOTE: Prior year actuals have been updated to reflect
the most current and accurate data available.)

FY 2002 Target: 80%

FY 2002 Actual: 85%

Discussion: As in prior years, the performance target
was surpassed, protecting the interests of the American people by effective legal
representation in more than 51,000 cases.

Public Benefit: The Department's success in civil litigation
preserves taxpayers' dollars through affirmative and defensive litigation and
ensures the intent of laws and of government programs and policies.

Approximately $440 million was recovered for the government and Indian tribes
from 1998 through 2002 from sixteen oil companies that knowingly undervalued the
oil produced from federal and Indian lands to reduce the amount of royalties owed
to the United States and Indian tribes. Additionally, the constitutionality of
the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 was upheld, and the owners and operators of EXXON
VALDEZ were denied access to Prince William Sound.

Discussion: As in prior years, the performance target was surpassed,
ensuring that immigration enforcement actions are upheld in federal trial and
appellate courts.

The Department received a record 7,500 new immigration cases in 2002, a 40
% increase over 2001. This growth resulted from intensified INS enforcement and
from the Attorney General's mandate to reduce the backlog of cases pending before
immigration judges.

Public Benefit: Effective defense of counterterrorism laws, such
as the USA PATRIOT Act and related antiterrorism legislation, and of counterterrorism
activities, upholds the government's response to the ongoing threat from terrorists.
The formal designation of terrorist organizations and the related freezing of
their financial assets constrain the proliferation and actions of terrorist groups.

Strategies to Achieve the FY2003/FY 2004 Goal:
Efforts will focus on: (1) continuing the fight in the war on terrorism; (2) continuing
to pursue health care fraud against federally funded programs, in concert with
federal and state law enforcement programs; (3) continuing to remove criminal
aliens and enforcing the Nation's immigration laws by effectively defending administrative
decisions and INS programs and policies; and (4) successfully resolving all civil
cases, including challenges to congressional enactments, federal programs and
policy initiatives.

Crosscutting Activities:
The Civil Division collaborates with the State and Treasury Departments, among
others, in the designation of foreign terrorist organizations. The Civil Division
and the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys work closely with the FBI, HHS, DOD,
the Veteran's Administration, and state medical fraud units to recover monies
lost by federal health care programs. They also participate with other federal,
state, and local agencies on the Consumer Protection Initiatives Committee of
the Attorney General's Council on White Collar Crime.

4.5C Increase the Number of Cases Using Alternative Dispute Resolution
(ADR)

[L]itigation counsel shall make reasonable attempts to resolve
a dispute expeditiously and properly before proceeding to trial. . . Where the
benefits of Alternative Dispute Resolution ("ADR") may be derived, and
after consultation with the agency referring the matter, litigation counsel should
suggest the use of an appropriate ADR technique to the parties. . . . To facilitate
broader and effective use of informal and formal ADR methods, litigation counsel
should be trained in ADR techniques.

It is our job to implement the President's directive consistently with our
mission to defend the interest of the United States in civil litigation proceedings.
In FY 2003, DOJ attorneys will increase efforts to employ ADR including mediation,
negotiation, and other litigation streamlining techniques in appropriate civil
cases.

Data Collection and Storage: The primary source of data collection for
tabulating the Department's use of ADR is component reporting. Each litigating
component is responsible for tracking attorney usage of ADR and forwarding this
information to the Office of Dispute Resolution. The primary source of case outcomes
is attorney evaluations.
Data Validation and Verification: CIV, CRT, and ENRD track ADR information
in case management/docket tracking systems; TAX and EOUSA gather data through
the use of manual records. The Office of Dispute Resolution gathers outcome information
through the use of manual records.

Data Limitations: The individual components are responsible for ensuring
compliance with their local procedures for maintaining the integrity of their
data collection systems.

ADR saved the Department attorneys' time in resolving litigation. For example,
attorneys estimated that early resolution of one case through mediation saved
an estimated 250 hours of depositions, another avoided 60 hours of discovery as
well as trial, another avoided at least 30 depositions, and another saved the
time and expense of full briefing of an issue.

Even where the case did not settle, ADR was still valuable in narrowing the
issues for trial or improving the relations between the parties. Attorneys reported
that ADR allowed the parties to negotiate a disposition that best served their
interests, and which may have been beyond the jurisdiction of a court to order.
For example, in several workplace cases, the parties agreed upon the voluntary
separation of a government employee, a result that could not have been accomplished
through trial.

Public Benefit: Mediation and other forms of dispute resolution
provide several important public benefits. First, mediation assists in the early
settlement of cases, thereby freeing resources to handle other matters that cannot
or should not settle. Second, mediators can assist counsel in negotiating favorable
settlement terms because the parties can focus on interests that may transcend
their legal positions and arrange for a disposition on terms a court would not
have the power to order. Third, mediation empowers individuals to participate
in the resolution of their own disputes, rather than deferring to their attorneys,
and provides a context for settlement discussions that minimizes the adversarial
nature of litigation.

Strategies to Achieve the FY2003/FY 2004 Goal:
In many circumstances, our attorneys are able to negotiate settlement in civil
litigation through one-on-one negotiations with opposing counsel. However, there
are also a considerable number of cases where such settlement discussions would
be unproductive, protracted, or highly positional. The use of dispute resolution
in such civil litigation, especially mediation, permits our attorneys to obtain
settlements that are in the best interests of the government. Mediation is the
preferred dispute resolution process because skilled mediators can work with the
parties and their counsel, encouraging them to go beyond the legal positions advanced
by counsel and focus on the underlying interests of the litigants. In many cases,
our attorneys are able to construct creative settlements that include terms favorable
to the United States that would not have been identified without the assistance
of a mediator. Our experience with the Department's dispute resolution program
continues to show that mediation permits more efficient negotiation. We remain
committed to promoting the use of dispute resolution in the Department's civil
litigation.

Crosscutting Activities:
Pursuant to the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act, the President appointed
the Attorney General to coordinate ADR for the entire executive branch of the
federal government, and the Office of Dispute Resolution manages these activities
on a day-to-day basis. In this role, the office works with the federal Interagency
ADR Working Group to draft national ADR policies, issue guidance on best practices,
and promote the use of ADR government-wide. Recent projects have included materials
covering confidentiality, evaluation, and arbitration. The office manages the
federal government's ADR website, www.adr.gov,
and is in the process of publishing a resource book for users of ADR both inside
and outside the government. The office conducts ADR training for other agencies
and assists them in locating appropriate neutrals throughout the country.